D&D 5E Are you permanently using any UA material in your games?

[Li Shenron]

With UA being published primarily for playtesting purposes, do you keep using any UA material in your games, even after it has been published with modifications or left seemingly abandoned by WotC?

I'm thinking that the only UA character option we've taken for permanent use by some PC at our table but we did not update to a "published version", is the centaur race. But with now some serious idea about picking up the Mythic Odissey of Theros (I haven't bought any book since Xanathar) which has an official version of the centaur, we might update our PC to using that one too.

Generally I would not be against a player asking for some older UA material to use if that was never officially released by WotC. I tend to think that if there is an official version, it is better to use that than the UA version. But sometimes I think some material gets worse after too much "normalization" before official release, and the original and more brave UA version could be better or more interesting.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

If I am using a UA I will usually get the book or at least the FantasyGrounds mod of the book.

 

[Nikosandros]

Normally I don't use UA material at all, but when they screened the improved dragonborns from Fizban, I immediately adopted it for the dragonborn fighter in one of my campaigns. After the definitive version was published with a slight nerf, we've left the UA version for that character.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I use all the UA skill-feats. They are half-feats (which I prefer) and allow double proficiency bonus for non-bard/rogues.

Other than that, there are a few miscellaneous pieces here or there, but just a handful.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

THe psycic playtest that had the psi die going up and down got played even after the official version was out

 

[Horwath]

UA warforged is more interesting than bland release version

 

[Weiley31]

Yes. ESPECIALLY the Squire of Solamnia/Knightly Order feats. (Sure, I'll have to refluff the titles of backgrounds.) Also, the Strixhaven UA will end up being "bonus" features you can add on top of the appropriate classes. Paladin will also be able access the Witherbloom Strixhaven UA features so that way we can get some of that hot goth girl Paladins going on.

A bunch of the UA skill feats and Weapon Mastery feats as well. Also, Raven Queen Warlock patron is probably my fave Patron option for a Warlock.

I like to also have the pre-nerfed versions of certain UA classes' features end up as "upgrades" to current class features as something the PCs can unlock. I also prefer the UA version of the Class Features Variants with some of the Tasha's published version. (Basically, I undo any nerfs made).
We also have the Love Domain clerics. But their alignment is Chaotic Evil and the Domain can be interchangeably referred to as Obsession.

Anything with races, taken out, is usually added back in. So Kenders will have the Kender Ace ability once again alongside their Fearlessness, Curiosity, and new Taunt. Owlin's get their Magic Sight feature back. So on, so on.

 

[DEFCON 1]

We used the Mystic in our Curse of Strahd game many years ago. And I don't know if it counts, but when KibblesTasty iterated on the artificer UA and created a much larger and complete class from it, we had a player use KT's alchemist.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Where the UA for Tasha's had broader spell lists for classes that what Tasha's actually had, we're using those. I have a Bard who has the Mind Sliver cantrip for example.

 

[iserith]

I don't and won't use any UA in my games. I leave the playtesting to others. Thank you for your service.